New County Supervisor Neal Coonerty
will be the main speaker at the Wednesday, May 9 RBDA General Meeting
to discuss local issues such as road repairs, fire protection, possible
changes in Timber Production Zone (TPZ) requirements, Cemex cement
plant air emissions and Bonny Doon limestone quarry expansion, UCSC
growth, and the pending transfer of property east of Hwy. 1 from the
Trust for Public Land to the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

Supervisor Coonerty will come
ready to answer any questions you may have on these and other issues
affecting Bonny Doon. This is a great opportunity to get to know your
new supervisor, only our third supervisor in about 30 years.

LAFCO Studies Fire Protection Issues

On April 4, Santa Cruz LAFCO (Local Agency Formation Commission)
conducted a study session for its commissioners on fire service trends
and countywide fire protection issues. The commission will hear a
number of different petitions from County fire districts in the coming
year, the Bonny Doon Fire District petition among them. Attendees
at the meeting included all LAFCO commissioners, several County
residents (including RBDA members and Bonny Doon Fire District
proponents), local press, as well as interested County representatives
from Monterey and San Mateo.

“Noteworthy was to have virtually all fire chiefs from the entire
County present,” said Pat McCormick, LAFCO Executive Officer. The
issues facing fire districts around the County and State are universal:
budget deficits, increasing staffing expenses and/or dwindling
volunteers, and the difficulties and rigors of training. McCormick
asked three local fire chiefs to kick off the session with a joint
presentation. “Among them they each had a different type of fire
department represented in this County,” said McCormick. “Scotts Valley
Chief Mike McMurry, who put the presentation together, represented the
department that provides a virtually complete paid staff response 24
hours per day without assistance from others. Felton Fire Chief Ron
Rickabaugh re p resented the department that has a paid chief and
everyone else a volunteer. John Ferreira, Santa Cruz-San Mateo Unit
Chief for California Dept of Forestry and Fire (CalFire, formerly CDF),
represented CalFire, which is unique unto itself. They each talked and
divided up the presentation. It was a great introduction to fire
protection in the County—and showed that everyone is dealing with very
similar issues to Bonny Doon.”

In particular, staffing is an issue everywhere in the state.
Volunteers, who have to be trained to the same level as professional
fire fighters, are getting harder to recruit, train, and retain.
Simultaneously, paid staff costs are going up. Felton Chief Rickabaugh
said, “Career firefighters make over $100,000 per year, volunteers get
$8 per call.” Gov. Schwarzenegger recently approved pay increases for
CalFire personnel, who make between $70,000 and $115,000 in wages and
overtime. Good news for CalFire employees, bad news for counties like
Santa Cruz who contract with CalFire for fire protection services and
now face costs that exceed budgets.

The Bonny Doon Fire District proposal estimated total personnel costs,
including benefits, for two full-time firefighters and one part-time
fire chief, would be comparable to what Ben Lomond and Boulder Creek
districts currently pay. McCormick will be releasing a full analysis of
all budget numbers—those supplied in the Bonny Doon petition and the
cumulative effect on County budget—in advance of the LAFCO hearing on
the Bonny Doon petition. Residents throughout the County will
also receive a questionnaire asking what services they deem essential
and how much they would pay for them.

The study session included a discussion of various solutions—some more,
some less successful—tried in other parts of the state for the
universal issues of budget, staffing, and training. “What seemed
clear,” said one Bonny Doon resident in attendance, “is that we really
need to get creative in how we solve our fire protection issues in
Bonny Doon.”

Demonstrating how little they care about how they are perceived by the
community, despite numerous statements to the contrary, UCSC filed a
suit last year to overturn Measures I & J, which were approved by
more than 75% of City of Santa Cruz voters. The two measures are
aimed at restricting and/or preventing the development of the upper
campus and forcing UCSC to pay for the increased City services required
by its planned growth under its new Long Range Development Plan (LRDP),
which itself is under legal challenge by the City, the County, and the
community group CLUE (Coalition for Limiting University Expansion).

Measure
I required City officials to refuse to provide City services to
accommodate UCSC’s growth unless UCSC pays the full cost of
constructing and operating such services. It further directed City
officials to take all legal actions “to avoid significant adverse
effects of University growth, particularly on the housing market,
traffic congestion, and water supply.” Measure J required a favorable
vote
by City residents before City sewer and water services could be
extended to the upper campus, outside City limits.

While UCSC’s suit challenged the City Council’s decision to forego an
Environmental Impact Report (a so-called Negative Declaration) on the
measures before putting the measures on the ballot, Judge Robert Atack
of Santa Cruz Superior Court on April 20 voided them on a technicality:
the Santa Cruz City Council had only given the public and UCSC 12 days
notice instead of the 20 required by the California State Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) that it was going to issue the Negative Declaration.
That issue wasn’t brought up by UCSC at the July 25 meeting when the
City Council voted to approve the Negative Declaration. Instead, UCSC
presented a lengthy, detailed argument about why an EIR was necessary,
since preventing growth on the upper campus could mean increased growth
on the lower campus. That in itself was ironic, since 1) UCSC’s
own EIR for its expansion plan is being challenged in court by the
City, County and CLUE over its gross inadequacy, and 2) UCSC would be
asking the City to draw up and pay for an EIR for the university’s
growth, which the City Council would rather not take place anyway.

Judge Atack’s decision means the City must pay for another election.
The measures undoubtedly will pass overwhelmingly again, and UCSC will
presumably then sue over the substantive issue of whether the EIR
should be required. Wouldn’t it better if they had just ignored the
technicality so that the central issue could have its day in court?

In the meantime, UCSC has begun negotiating with the City and the
County Board of Supervisors over the LRDP EIR suit. “We will be making
a fair-share [monetary] offer and then hope to put these issues behind
us,” UCSC Chancellor George Blumenthal said after the decision on
Measures I & J. But judging from the hugely different amounts of
money that it would take to mitigate UCSC’s growth that the two sides
seem to be thinking about, the chancellor’s hope seems futile. Besides,
CLUE is not ready to drop its suit in return for a monetary settlement:
it wants a very meaningful reduction of the university’s impact on the
quality of life and environment in Santa Cruz, a real change in the way
the UC system decides where to allocate student growth, and a new LRDP
EIR that will truly assess the cumulative impacts of UCSC growth.

Barring some negotiated settlement, the LRDP EIR lawsuits will likely be taken up in Superior Court sometime in June or July.

Changes Proposed for TPZ Zoning

The Santa Cruz County Planning Department is proposing to raise the
minimum parcel size for Timber Production Zone (TPZ) zoning from the
current five-acre minimum, the lowest for any county in the state, to
20 acres. Most local environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club, as
well as forest advocates and many rural property owners, are advocating
a minimum size of 80 acres, which is the largest minimum parcel size
allowed by the State. In actuality, the state law regulating TPZ
rezoning refers to a single parcel or contiguous parcels in the same
ownership. There is no limit on how large a parcel can be that’s zoned
TPZ. Zoning land as TPZ gives property owners who intend to
harvest the timber on their property a tax break until the timber is
harvested. The ability to zone land as TPZ was created in 1976 through
the state Forest Taxation Act, amended in 1982 as the Timberland
Productivity Act (TPA). TPA was created to protect the timberlands of
the State for long-term timber management by giving a tax break to
timberland owners while reducing development and subdivision potential
of parcels zoned for timber production.

In 1976 counties were required to zone to TPZ all lands assessed for
timber as the highest use as well as all other lands deemed by the
assessor to qualify. Property owners could petition to have their
parcels excluded. In 1978, when Santa Cruz completed the required
rezoning, 45 parcel owners had their lands excluded. The County rezoned
all other lands they deemed met the qualifications set by the State.
However, a separate state provision allows timberland owners to
petition to have their lands zoned to TPZ.

There are significant implications beyond property tax relief for lands
zoned TPZ. The wording of the law states that by zoning to TPZ you must
“have a reasonable expectation of harvest” and counties can establish
“compatible uses” which usually limit future development and
subdivision potential of land zoned TPZ (these limits vary depending on
size and location of the parcel). Land rezoned TPZ must remain as such
for a minimum of 10 years and then requires a Board of Supervisors vote
to take it out of TPZ.

In 2006, a State Supreme Court decision affirmed a County’s ability to
use its zoning authority to determine where logging takes place. Santa
Cruz County zoning ordinances prohibit logging in most zone districts
other than TPZ. However, any landowner with the minimum parcel size can
petition to rezone to TPZ and the County has little authority to stop
this.

The timber industry is arguing vehemently against an increase in
minimum parcel size, though the actual impact to the logging industry
of raising the minimum to 80 acres may be relatively small in Santa
Cruz County. According to the newly renamed California Dept. of
Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFire, formerly CDF) figures and
research done by one of our board members, between 1996 and 2005
approximately 22,000 acres were approved for logging in Santa Cruz
County. Of those, only 33 acres were on Timber Harvest Plans (THP) of
five acres or less. Less than 10% of the acreage was for a THP of less
than 40 acres. Close to 17,000 acres or 80% of THPs were for parcels
greater than 80 acres.

65,000 acres, or roughly 25% of the County, is already zoned TPZ.
Another 7,800 acres are in parcels of 80 acres or greater, making a
minimum of 72,800 acres available for timber harvest. The actual figure
is somewhat higher, since a landowner can petition to include any lands
that are adjacent or contiguous (reasonably close to make it an
economic unit) to be included in the same TPZ, regardless of size. The
direct impact to Bonny Doon land is unknown.

Santa Cruz County did extensive research in 1977-78 after the passage
of the TPA, which required counties to zone all qualifying lands as TPZ
by 1978. The County created criteria for zoning, which included factors
that addressed the economic and environmental viability of timber
harvesting, such as type of timber, surrounding vegetation type, soil
and topography (e.g., steep slopes, slides, riparian corridors), and
access. Most people in local environmental groups think the County
zoned all appropriate lands in 1978 and see resetting the minimum
parcel size for landowner petitions to 80 acres as an affirmation of
the County’s earlier work.

Planning Staff presented their recommendation and staff report at the
Board of Supervisors meeting on April 24. The issue was continued to
May 1 when the Board was unable to reach agreement on a minimum parcel
size proposal. Once agreement is reached, the issue goes back to the
County Planning Dept., which will conduct an environmental assessment,
then forward findings to the Planning Commission. There will then be
several opportunities for Bonny Doon residents to give their input. The
Planning Commission will hold a hearing or series of hearings before
making recommendations to the County Board of Supervisors. Expect the
Board of Supervisors to conduct more hearings before making a final
decision.

Water Still Flowing Despite Drought

After a winter of great sunshine and little rain, there is concern
about how Santa Cruz City’s water needs will impact Bonny Doon
watersheds. “We haven’t had a year that looks worse than this [for
rainfall] since 1977,” says Bill Kocher, Santa Cruz City Water
Director. “The good news is that there won’t be much impact on Bonny
Doon watersheds this year. What makes it less severe than you’d think
is that [so far] it’s just one year. Also, last year was unusually wet
and we’re still riding on that high.”

In fact, Kocher calls last year “a water purveyor’s dream.” Heavy rains
late in the season contributed to excellent water supplies in the
Newell Creek watershed, from which the City takes 70% or more of its
water supply. Over the past 63 years, the average annual rainfall in
that watershed has been about 49 inches. Last year’s rainfall was 64
inches, with most received late in the season. As a result, stream
flows today are much higher than expected after so little rain, and
supplies in Loch Lomond are still good. North Coast watersheds,
including Bonny Doon, provide only about 20% of the City’s water and in
drought years, the City takes additional supplies from Newell Creek—not
North Coast—watershed.

“We don’t consider ourselves to be in a water flow emergency this
year,” says Kocher, “though if this continues into next year, then we
will be.” The City is placing restrictions on outdoor watering starting
Water Still Flowing Despite Drought May 1 as a conservation measure in
case a second drought year happens.

Chris Berry, Water Resources Manager for the City of Santa Cruz,
reports that they are monitoring water levels at multiple locations on
Liddell, Majors, Laguna, and Reggiardo Creeks and monitoring water
quality on the Laguna lagoon. They may do biological monitoring (e.g.,
for fish population density and diversity), though no plans have been
finalized for this. “Flows in Laguna Creek are not terrible now,” says
Berry, “but I am concerned about flow levels in August and September.”
However, in addition to the benefit of last year’s high rainfall, Berry
explains, “the City recently let more water out of Laguna dam then we
have during past droughts. This will help to maintain higher flows for
aquatic habitat than were present during previous drought years.”

Berry is also monitoring turbidity at Liddell Spring and Laguna Creek.
“This is not usually an issue in summer,” says Berry, “but Cemex has
repeatedly challenged our background turbidity data so the City is
monitoring summer turbidity to get [baseline levels in the areas] as
quarry blasting has repeatedly resulted in turbidity spikes in Liddell
Spring. This impact is most noticeable during dry weather when
turbidity baselines are generally very low in the relatively pristine
watersheds of Bonny Doon.”

Fire Team Unpancake Breakfast Sunday, May 6

The Bonny Doon Fire Team’s annual Unpancake Breakfast takes place on
May 6 from 8 am to 1 pm at the Martin Road Fire Station. This is a
great way to support your Bonny Doon Fire and Rescue team, meet your
neighbors, and eat a hearty breakfast. The Bonny Doon Fire
District Committee members will also be on hand to discuss the proposal
to create a new Fire District in Bonny Doon.

Do You Have A Piece Of RBDA Or Bonny Doon History?

This is the 50th year of the RBDA, and we are hoping to put together a
celebration to mark its success in preserving the rural and natural
qualities of this unique part of California.

Do you have stories to share about the RBDA’s history, or about life in
Bonny Doon? If so, please contact RBDA Corresponding Secretary Yana
Jacobs at 423-9193, or through the RBDA website. We are also
looking for people to help put the celebration together. The board
members are all very busy handling their duties as RBDA officers. For
this to be a fun and meaningful event, we need help from the RBDA
membership. We would like to make this a potluck with music, so we’ll
need a crew to organize it, set up and clean up, people to tend a
barbecue, some musicians, and of course some story tellers.

If you can help out, contact Yana (see below for contact info).

RBDA GENERAL MEETING AGENDA - MAY 9, 2007
1) Featured Program: State of the County, with 3rd District Supervisor Neal Coonerty

Bonny Doon's voice in preserving our special quality of life,
The Highlander, is mailed free to Bonny Doon residents prior to the
RBDA General Meetings, which are usually held on second Wednesdays
of
January, March, May, July, September and November.
We encourage you to participate.

Send mail correspondence to the Highlander Editor at the above
address,
or by email, below.

If you live in or own property within this district, roughly from Empire
Grade to the ocean and from San Vicente Creek to the City of Santa Cruz
border, you are eligible to be an RBDA member.

Please support the RBDA!
Dues payments count for a full year from date received.
Dues mostly go for printing and mailing The Highlander,
your voice for keeping Bonny Doon rural and natural.
Those who make additional contributions qualify as: